[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2765-2772]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 SOLDIERS', SAILORS', AIRMEN'S AND MARINES' BILL OF RIGHTS ACT OF 1999

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.


                            Amendment No. 9

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on agreeing to amendment 
No. 9 offered by the Senator from Idaho. The yeas and nays have not 
been ordered.
  Mr. WARNER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  The order provides that at 2:30 we will proceed to a vote. But it 
also provided for the opportunity for anyone to express, through an 
objection, such concerns as they may have. I suggest perhaps just a 
minute or two here before we commence. And I say to the Chair, it is 
our expectation this vote will go forward, but I do want to protect the 
rights, for 1 minute, of those who might wish to come forward.
  I am informed that the Democratic caucus is still in progress; is 
that it? I think it has broken up now. We are ready on this side. Mr. 
President, I am informed that we are ready to go.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair thanks the Senator.
  Mr. WARNER. I just wanted to protect the rights of others.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on agreeing to amendment 
No. 9 offered by the Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. WARNER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on agreeing to amendment 
No. 9. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. GORTON (when his name was called). Present.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Shelby) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 87, nays 11, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 20 Leg.]

                                YEAS--87

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin

[[Page 2766]]


     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith Bob (NH)
     Smith Gordon H (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Thomas
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--11

     Dodd
     Feingold
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Kyl
     McCain
     Nickles
     Sessions
     Stevens
     Thompson

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Gorton
       

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Shelby
       
  The amendment (No. 9) was agreed to.
  Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I want to alert our colleagues to a fact 
which was not clear the last time we spoke on the subject of this 
amendment which we just adopted. There was not certainty as to whether 
that amendment would have been subject to a point of order had a point 
of order been made. We protected that possibility in our unanimous 
consent agreement in the event the Parliamentarian ruled that it would 
have been subject to a point of order.
  In fact, we now understand that it would have been subject to a point 
of order, and therefore we have now another provision in the bill that 
is in violation of the Budget Act because it is not paid for. That is 
something which we should really be very conscious of as we go along 
here and very concerned about.
  But we did protect our colleagues in the event that that was the 
ruling, and none of our colleagues decided to raise the point of order. 
But in fact it could have been raised. And we should take very serious 
note of any of the violations of the Budget Act as we proceed, because 
at some point we are going to have to pay for the amendments we add as 
well as the bill itself.
  I thank the Chair.
  Mr. ALLARD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                            Amendment No. 11

(Purpose: To make a limitation on tuition assistance for members of the 
     Armed Forces inapplicable to members deployed in support of a 
              contingency operation or similar operation)

  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment to S. 4. The 
amendment has already been sent to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) proposes an amendment 
     numbered 11.

  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. 104. INCREASED TUITION ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMED FORCES DEPLOYED IN SUPPORT OF A 
                   CONTINGENCY OPERATION OR SIMILAR OPERATION.

       (a) Inapplicability of Limitation on Amount.--Section 
     2007(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (3) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) in the case of a member deployed outside the United 
     States in support of a contingency operation or similar 
     operation, all of the charges may be paid while the member is 
     so deployed.''.
       (b) Increased Authority Subject to Appropriations.--The 
     authority to pay additional tuition assistance under 
     paragraph (4) of section 2007(a) of title 10, United States 
     Code, as added by subsection (a), may be exercised only to 
     the extent provided for in appropriations Acts.

  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I offer an amendment to S. 4, the Soldiers', 
Sailors', Airmen's and Marines' Bill of Rights Act of 1999.
  The need for this bill is obvious. The Army, Navy, and Air Force are 
all experiencing recruitment and retention problems that threaten to 
further degrade our already overstressed military. By every measure, 
quality of life issues are the center of the problem. Fortunately, our 
military personnel don't join to get rich. In this all too material 
age, it is refreshing to note that their motivations to remain in 
uniform do not include financial gain.
  Nonetheless, it is a fact that our current military is not the 
military of our fathers. It currently includes the highest percentage 
of families in its history. The pay, the retirement, and the medical 
benefits are issues that must be addressed. This bill seeks to do that.
  Educational opportunities are also important to our service people, 
especially those who perhaps are not career oriented. We cannot lose 
sight of the fact that what we do here today will benefit not just our 
military personnel by increasing knowledge, eliminating boredom, and 
stimulating the mind, but are all things that improve the capability of 
our young men and women in our armed services.
  Our society at large will benefit especially with regard to 
educational opportunities. Today's corporal studying in his off-duty 
hours for his bachelor's degree might well be tomorrow's small business 
employer. Nevertheless, his extra effort will improve his job 
performance immediately. The Department of Defense has long offered 
excellent opportunities for active duty personnel to better themselves 
through education. The administrators of these programs are 
enthusiastic and devoted to the uniformed people they serve. There is 
one thing we can do, however, to fine tune the regulations they must 
follow, and my amendment is designed to do just that.
  Currently, secretaries of each branch of the service are authorized 
to pay up to 75 percent of college tuition and related instructional 
costs for most personnel pursuing additional education in their off 
duty hours. However, for Navy personnel deployed aboard ship, the 
Secretary of the Navy is authorized to pay the full 100 percent of such 
costs by virtue of their PACE program. PACE is an acronym for ``Program 
for Afloat College Education.'' Therefore, a soldier on deployment in 
Bosnia may only be receiving reimbursement for 75 percent of his 
tuition costs, while just offshore, a sailor deployed aboard ship is 
receiving 100 percent.
  My amendment would authorize all service secretaries to pay up to 100 
percent of tuition costs for personnel deployed on a contingency basis. 
It does not require that a specific percentage be paid. It simply gives 
a service secretary that option. And because the exercising of that 
option is contingent on the availability of funding, no additional 
appropriation is required.
  This amendment will equalize the playing field between the services 
as well as make the difficult deployments to such places as Bosnia and 
Saudi Arabia a bit more beneficial to those service people who wish to 
take advantage of the opportunity. It is supported by the Defense 
Department and is indisputable in the interests of our young men and 
women in uniform. I ask my colleagues for their support of this 
amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, my colleague from the State of Wyoming has 
done a great job on the amendment. It is discretionary and begins to 
put on par the Army and Air Force with the Navy program. We think it is 
the right solution and the right direction for this. So we are not 
going to object to the Enzi amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Do other Senators wish to be heard?
  The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Wyoming for his 
amendment. It is a very good amendment. It equalizes the Army and the 
Air Force with what already exists for the Navy and the Marines. The 
reason we should equalize it is because when our Army and Air Force 
personnel are deployed, they are effectively in the same situation and 
need this tuition assistance to the same extent that the Navy and the 
Marines already have it authorized. As Senator

[[Page 2767]]

Allard said, it is discretionary with our service secretaries. That 
means that it hopefully will be accomplished and hopefully can be done 
within their budgets but does not raise a Budget Act problem.
  I commend our friend from Wyoming, and we support the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from Wyoming.
  The amendment (No. 11) was agreed to.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. ROBB addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator from Virginia yield for a 
unanimous consent request?
  Mr. ROBB. The Senator from Virginia is delighted to yield to the 
ranking member for a unanimous consent request.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Matthew 
Varzally and John Bradshaw of Senator Wellstone's staff have floor 
privileges during consideration of S. 4.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. ROBB. Thank you, Mr. President.


                            Amendment No. 8

(Purpose: To increase the amount of certain bonuses and special pay and 
  to authorize payment of certain additional special pay and bonuses)

  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 8 previously filed 
at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Virginia (Mr. Robb), for himself, Mr. 
     Cleland, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Bingaman proposes an amendment 
     numbered 8.

  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under 
``Amendments Submitted.'')
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I rise to offer the special incentive pay 
amendment to S. 4.
  I am pleased to be joined in offering this legislation by our 
colleague from Massachusetts, Senator Kennedy, Senator Cleland from 
Georgia, Senator Kerrey from Nebraska, and Senator Bingaman from New 
Mexico.
  Yesterday, Mr. President, a number of our colleagues, among them 
Senator Allard, described the acute challenges that are faced by the 
Navy as it struggles to retain sufficient numbers of critical personnel 
like Navy SEALS, surface warfare officers, nuclear-qualified officers, 
and career enlisted fliers.
  While S. 4, with its significant pay raises, improved retirement and 
enhanced GI bill benefits is an important step in the right direction, 
we still have big problems in these smaller categories of military 
service where we have been only marginally successful in our retention 
efforts.
  This amendment begins to address the downward retention trends the 
Navy is experiencing in these areas by aligning pay increases with 
problem specialties.
  S. 4's compensation approach begins to address the services' broad 
recruiting and retention concerns, but it won't assure that the 
undermanned, highly skilled warfare specialists that Senator Allard 
described so eloquently yesterday will get well any time soon.
  Special incentive pay and bonuses have been the shaping tools of 
choice to fill the breach. The experience of the military services is 
that historically targeted kinds of bonuses have proven highly 
effective and very cost efficient in attacking retention problem areas 
within specific communities.
  This year, the Navy and Air Force would like to make even greater use 
of this proven strategy. They have fully funded in their budgets, and 
have asked us to support, establishing two new bonuses and expanding 
authority for four others.
  This amendment to S. 4 provides these targeted fixes. Specifically, 
it addresses enlisted recruiting and retention shortfalls by increasing 
the maximum authorization of the enlistment bonus, or EB as it is 
referred to, and selective reenlistment bonus, or SRB. And it addresses 
the critical shortfalls in the unrestricted line communities by 
providing two new continuation bonuses, one for surface warfare 
officers, and another for special warfare officers.
  Finally, several existing bonuses are increased, including those for 
divers, nuclear-qualified officers, linguists, and other critical 
specialties. These pay increases will target specific job skills at 
experience levels to cost-effectively attract, retain, and distribute 
highly trained personnel at critical points in their career.
  The Nation simply cannot afford to continue to pay as much as we do 
to recruit and train these talented individuals only to see them leave 
the service out of frustration over the inadequacies of their pay and 
benefits and the promise of better compensation in the private sector.
  Mr. President, as I stated yesterday, the special incentive pay 
amendment to S. 4 is exactly the kind of targeted fix Congress can and 
should support. I hope our colleagues will join us in sending a signal 
to our men and women in uniform that we have listened to them and that 
we understand their needs.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor and ask for its adoption.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I support this amendment. We are all 
concerned about reports of declining retention in our Armed Forces. Our 
midgrade officers and enlisted personnel are leaving the service at 
alarming rates. This amendment directly addresses this critical problem 
by focusing special and incentive pays on areas where the Armed Forces 
face the greatest retention challenges.
  The readiness of our Armed Forces must be a top priority. Our service 
men and women are an indispensable part of our Nation's defense. We 
must act to improve retention in order to ensure the readiness of our 
Armed Forces. In today's tight budget environment, it is imperative 
that we efficiently use our taxpayers' dollars. Special and incentive 
pays are an effective way to increase retention while being mindful of 
costs.
  Our amendment responds to the needs of the Armed Services by 
authorizing programs that the services specifically want and that are 
ready to be implemented. These programs have been thoroughly researched 
by the services and will have an immediate impact on retention.
  At the Senate Armed Services Readiness Hearing in January, Admiral 
Jay Johnson, the Chief of Naval Operations, agreed with my assessment 
that current Navy retention rates will result in the Navy having 50 
percent fewer Surface Warfare Officers than needed. Officers in these 
positions have never been authorized to receive special pay incentives, 
and retention of these men and women is now among the lowest of any 
officer community in the Armed Forces. This amendment gives the Navy a 
flexible means to address this critical retention issue, and will give 
the same flexibility to the other services in the specific areas where 
the most attention is needed.
  In these critical times for recruiting and retention of military 
personnel, we must enact sensible legislation that provides the 
services with effective flexibility in the management of their 
personnel challenges. No one knows the full effects of retention 
problems more than the services themselves. We need to give the 
services the tools they need so they can help ensure the readiness of 
our Armed Forces. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this 
amendment and I commend Senator Robb  and Senator Cleland for their 
leadership on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further discussion? If not, the 
question is on agreeing to amendment No. 8.
  The amendment (No. 8) was agreed to.

[[Page 2768]]


  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. ALLARD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Crapo). The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I rise to add my enthusiastic support for 
S. 4.
  The most important responsibility a nation has is to its people's 
security, ensuring a nation's freedom. As all of us in life, nations 
and governments are no different. We must prioritize. We must 
prioritize our resources. We must prioritize our agendas. We must 
prioritize the focus that we give to our people.
  As important as is Social Security, and Medicare, and tax cuts, and 
education and all that compose a society that helps develop a culture, 
national security is the highest priority, the highest priority of a 
government, and its most important responsibility.
  There will be much debate, as there should be much debate, over the 
next year and a half about the priorities of this Nation as we move 
into the next century. None will be more important than the debate that 
is occurring in this Chamber today, because what we are saying, the 
message we are sending to our people, to our friends and our foes alike 
around the world, is that, first, we will address the important issues 
confronting our national security interests; second, we will put into 
play and into our national security interests the resources necessary 
to maintain a national security system second to none. We will, in 
fact, prioritize our national security so that it will, as history has 
shown, guarantee our foreign policy, our export expansion, our trade 
reform. All of these are part of an overarching policy that connects, 
and we cannot have one without the other. We know--we have heard today, 
we have heard over the last 2 days--the problems that now confront our 
military--readiness, retention, recruitment.
  Any measure we take of our national security today comes up short, 
comes up wanting, and it is the responsibility of this Congress to 
lead; it is the responsibility of the President to lead, and it is the 
responsibility of America to prioritize the national security interests 
of our country.
  We need, more than ever before, the best, the brightest, young men 
and women to make a military career a career not only they can be proud 
of, our Nation can be proud of, but a career that serves our interests.
  When we look at what has happened to this military in the last 10 
years--longer deployments, more deployments, losing our senior enlisted 
halfway through their 20 years, pilots dropping out, the investment our 
society puts in these men and women--we find we are perilously close to 
the edge as to how far we can continue to defend not only our freedom 
but our interests in the world. And make no mistake about this, Mr. 
President. We just don't have select interests in the world; all the 
world is in our interests. Does that mean we are the international 
policemen? No. What it does mean is, because we do live in a globally 
connected world, a very competitive world, that in every corner of the 
world our interest is peace, stability, freedom; the development of 
democratic governments and market economies are in the interests of all 
of our people.
  So, this is not esoteric. This is relevant. And as we close the 
debate on this issue, we are talking about more than just putting the 
necessary resources into our national security commitments and 
capabilities, but we are sending a message to our people, to our 
culture, to our society, that in fact we very much value the men and 
women who make defending our freedoms their life. What we are saying, 
as well, to the families of these men and women is: We value you. We 
know the hardships that you deal with. We know about those long 
deployments. Not since Vietnam--and I see my colleague, Senator Robb, 
standing across the way--not since Senator Robb and I served in Vietnam 
has there been any addressing of the pay scale of our military. That is 
embarrassing. That is not worthy of a great nation and a great people.
  So, again, I say this is not only in the best interests of our 
country, but it is making a very specific and definite statement to our 
people, to our culture, to our society that duty, honor, and country 
count. Duty, honor, and country count. We want people to be proud to 
serve our country in uniform. We want to acknowledge them, not just by 
increasing their pay and their benefits--because that is, in part, a 
measurement of their worth and a way to keep score--but by saying: We 
know your worth. We know how important you are and we value that. We 
need you.
  For those reasons and many more that we have heard today and we will 
hear tomorrow, I strongly support S. 4.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I want to recognize in a public way the 
fine statement of my colleague from Nebraska and his hard work on this 
and many other pieces of legislation coming before the Senate. It is 
always good to hear from somebody who has personally served in Vietnam 
and been under fire, so to speak. I want everybody to know it is people 
like my colleague from Nebraska and their dedication to this country 
and to freedom which is the reason we think this bill is so important. 
This is the first major increase in military pay since 1982.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me also commend Senator Hagel for his 
speech. He inevitably is on the floor when we have a defense 
authorization bill or an item related closely to it, as this bill is. 
He is here, fervently urging support of our men and women in our 
uniformed military. I just want to say that voice is a particularly 
powerful voice, given Senator Hagel's background. I again compliment 
him and thank him for the ongoing commitment. He has not forgotten 
where he came from, as we sometimes say, and it is very important that 
we hear such strong voices as Senator Hagel's.
  Mr. HAGEL. I thank my colleague.


                            Amendment No. 8

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, while I am on my feet, if I could also 
thank Senator Robb for the previous amendment. I was not here. I had to 
leave for a moment. But it is a very important amendment which we just 
adopted. We did it in a few moments, but this increased special and 
incentive pay provision that Senator Robb has now inserted in this bill 
is targeted at critical specialties where services are having a 
significant retention problem. It is very important that we do that.
  This provision was in the budget which was submitted to us, but it 
was not included in this pay bill. It should have been. I think it was 
a significant oversight that it was not. That oversight has been 
corrected by Senator Robb, who is here, as always, watching very, very 
closely and carefully to make sure that we do the right thing by our 
troops and by our defense and by our security needs. I thank him for 
determining that this was left out of a bill which is aimed at 
supporting our troops, and should not have been. Because of his energy 
and his perception, it is now back in the bill. I thank him for it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia is recognized.
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, if I may, I thank the ranking member for his 
kind words and his leadership on the Armed Services Committee. I join 
in paying tribute to my fellow Vietnam veteran, Senator Hagel from 
Nebraska. It was for all of us who shared that experience a distinct 
pleasure to have a fellow warrior, comrade in arms, with us who not 
only understood the causes for which we fought and the trials and 
tribulations of those who wear the uniform of our country, but was 
willing to continue to stand up and be counted in those particular 
instances where it really matters to those we ask ultimately to place 
themselves in harm's way for our country's benefit.
  So I join in the tribute that the Senator from Colorado made and 
commend him, as well, for the eloquent speech he made yesterday in 
underscoring the

[[Page 2769]]

need to address the critical concerns about retention, particularly in 
some of the critical MOSs.


                            Amendment No. 15

    (Purpose: To amend title 37, United States Code, to improve the 
                 aviation career officers special pay)

  Mr. ROBB. With that, Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk 
and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Robb], for himself, Mr. 
     McCain, and Mr. Bingaman, proposes an amendment numbered 15.

  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 28, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:

     SEC. 104. AVIATION CAREER OFFICER SPECIAL PAY.

       (a) Period of Authority.--Subsection (a) of section 301b of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``Authorized.--'';
       (2) by striking ``during the period beginning on January 1, 
     1989, and ending on December 31, 1999,'' and inserting 
     ``during the period described in paragraph (2),''; and
       (2) adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) applies with respect to agreements 
     executed during the period beginning on the first day of the 
     first month that begins on or after the date of the enactment 
     of the Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's, and Marines' Bill of 
     Rights Act of 1999 and ending on December 31, 2004.''.
       (b) Repeal of Limitation to Certain Years of Career 
     Aviation Service.--Subsection (b) of such section is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (5);
       (2) by inserting ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4); and
       (4) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (5).
       (c) Repeal of Lower Alternative Amount for Agreement To 
     Serve for 3 or Fewer Years.--Subsection (c) of such section 
     is amended by striking ``than--'' and all that follows and 
     inserting ``than $25,000 for each year covered by the written 
     agreement to remain on active duty.''.
       (d) Proration Authority for Coverage of Increased Period of 
     Eligibility.--Subsection (d) of such section is amended by 
     striking ``14 years of commissioned service'' and inserting 
     ``25 years of aviation service''.
       (e) Terminology.--Such section is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (f), by striking ``A retention bonus'' 
     and inserting ``Any amount''; and
       (2) in subsection (i)(1), by striking ``retention bonuses'' 
     in the first sentence and inserting ``special pay under this 
     section''.
       (f) Repeal of Content Requirements for Annual Report.--
     Subsection (i)(1) of such section is further amended by 
     striking the second sentence.
       (g) Technical Amendment.--Subsection (g)(3) of such section 
     if amended by striking the second sentence.
       (h) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made 
     by this section shall take effect on the first day of the 
     first month that begins on or after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, this amendment is the aviation career 
officer special pay amendment to S. 4. I am very pleased to be joined 
in offering this amendment by the distinguished Senator from Arizona, 
Senator McCain. He has been a major force in taking care of our 
military aviators for many years, and I am very pleased to have Senator 
McCain as a cosponsor as well as the distinguished Senator from New 
Mexico, Mr. Bingaman.
  Mr. President, my colleagues on the Senate Armed Services Committee 
are all very much aware of the serious retention problems now faced by 
DOD, and especially those pertaining to pilots. The Air Force, for 
example, is losing three pilots for every two pilots it trains. You 
don't need to have a math degree to understand the implications of that 
statistic. To quote Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mike Ryan, this is 
``one of the most serious pilot force challenges in Air Force 
history.'' And the Navy's situation is no less daunting.
  Current law allows aviation officers from O-1s to O-5s with 6 to 13 
years of service to receive a bonus of up to $25,000 a year if the 
officer agrees to complete 14 years; or up to $12,000 per year if the 
officer agrees to complete 1, 2, or 3 additional years.
  While existing law was intended to fix retention problems in specific 
aviation communities such as the F/A-18 community, retention problems 
are now showing up across the board. This amendment is straightforward. 
Its intent is to give DOD maximum flexibility to stop the widespread 
hemorrhaging of pilots. The provision broadens eligibility from 
anywhere from 1 to 25 years of service and allows for up to $25,000 for 
each year of extended duty.
  DOD's retention and recruiting problems can grow rapidly. Indeed, 
many problems that DOD did not even report just a year ago were 
reported with alarm just 6 months ago. We need to give the Department 
the flexibility and the headroom to manage a serious and unpredictable 
problem that cannot be adjusted only once a year by the Congress.
  To address concerns that we are ceding too much authority to DOD, 
this authority must be renewed after 5 years, and the Secretary of 
Defense will be required to report annually to the defense committees 
on the impact of this increased authority on the retention of aviators.
  This provision is supported by the Department of Defense and is 
included in the budget request. The flexibility afforded by this 
provision reflects a consensus of service views developed and will 
allow each service the ability to tailor compensation programs to meet 
their specific retention challenges and to accommodate their unique 
career path requirements.
  During a period of excessive and costly resignations, we simply 
cannot afford not to give DOD the tools it needs to fix the retention 
problem. I urge my colleagues to support this provision and help us to 
address one of our most serious readiness dilemmas.
  I yield the floor. I ask for whatever action the managers may wish to 
take on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? The Senator from 
Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I compliment my colleague for his hard 
work on the Armed Services Committee. I do agree with him; the idea of 
giving discretionary authority to the Secretaries to meet certain 
retention challenges that come up with qualified pilots is extremely 
important.
  The question I would like to ask my friend from Virginia with regard 
to his amendment is that I understand that the funds to cover the cost 
of this amendment are in the fiscal year 2000 defense budget; is that 
accurate?
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I respond to the distinguished Senator from 
Colorado by saying that the information provided to this Senator is 
that it is, in fact, included. There was some concern about one of the 
services having an objection to this provision at one point. I 
understand that was cleared up, and it is now in the budget. If there 
is any information to the contrary, because we haven't actually had the 
presentation of those details, I will inform the committee before any 
additional action is taken on this amendment.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, in that case, if this has all been cleared 
within the budget, then we have no objection to this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
  Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, let me, again, commend 
our friend from Virginia for his leadership in this area. This is one 
of our greatest areas of shortfall. It is one of our greatest retention 
problems. We have to try to do better to retain our pilots, and this 
amendment will go a long way, indeed, the administration proposal--
hopefully it is in their proposal--will go, we believe at least, some 
way in terms of retaining pilots as its goal. It is a very important 
goal.
  I, again, thank the Senator from Virginia for his leadership in 
zeroing in on some of the greatest problems that we face in our defense 
budget, and that is the retention problem of pilots. So we very 
strongly support this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? If not, the question 
is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from Virginia, 
Mr. Robb.

[[Page 2770]]

  The amendment (No. 15) was agreed to.
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I thank my colleague 
from Michigan.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, the overall goal of this bill is to address 
the critical recruitment and retention problems facing our military 
today. I strongly support that objective. We have heard that 
recruitment numbers are down; that the Navy is 20,000 sailors short of 
what it needs to meet our national interests at sea; that within the 
last three months the Army was 2,300 soldiers short of its recruitment 
goal; and that increasingly pilots are leaving the service to take more 
lucrative jobs with private airlines. These are serious problems 
requiring serious attention.
  At a time when we are asking our Armed Forces to undertake more 
different kinds of missions, we need to provide incentives to men and 
women to serve and to be able to keep those who are currently serving. 
A 1998 Youth Attitude Tracking Study of 10,000 young men and women 
found that the desire to serve in our military remains strong. In fact, 
more than 25% of the men surveyed said they wanted to join one of the 
active duty services. The percentage of women who expressed interest 
actually increased by a percentage point from last year, reaching 13% 
for 1998. Therefore, if the initial desire is there, we should not 
allow it to be clouded by fears of low pay, frequent deployments and 
insufficient retirement benefits once they sign up. We must do 
everything we can to ensure that high quality men and women will 
continue to join the United States Armed Services maintaining a force 
that is second to none in the world. The U.S. military maintains its 
stature because of the people who serve in it.
  We cannot afford to lose them or lower the standards of recruitment 
just to fill in the holes.
  Unfortunately, the reality is that we are losing them and we are 
being forced to look at ways of lowering the bar so that each service 
can meet its recruitment goal for the coming years. A strong economy 
able to boast of high paying jobs in the private sector is causing 
extreme recruitment and retention problems for the Department of 
Defense. S. 4 attempts to reverse these problems by offering high pay 
raises, reforming the pay table, establishing a retirement savings plan 
and expanding Montgomery GI bill benefits for those who serve and will 
serve in the military. Specifically, it provides for a 4.8% pay raise 
for every member of the Armed Services. It changes the pay scale to 
recognize and reward meritorious service rather than the number of 
years served. It establishes a thrift savings plan similar to the one 
available to Federal civil employees and available to many in the 
private sector by way of 401-K plans. It also provides a monthly 
subsistence allowance for those service personnel eligible to receive 
food stamps and expands current Montgomery GI Bill benefits both in the 
amount of money provided and in the number of people who can use it, 
among many other things.
  When I read through this bill, I find many things that I believe can 
improve the current system and I support the general thrust of this 
legislation. I believe that significant pay increases are necessary 
both to help those currently serving in the military and those who 
might serve in the future. The Administration did not ignore the call 
for pay increases coming from many personnel, as well as the Joint 
Chiefs. They are in the President's budget request. It is clear that 
military pay must be competitive with wages paid in the private sector.
  It truly saddens me that about 12,000 of the brave men and women who 
have chosen to serve their country by defending the flag, to which we 
all pledge allegiance, are on food stamps. These people should not be 
forced to make a decision between serving their country and bringing 
home enough money to make ends meet. At a time when our economy is 
growing and higher paying jobs require the kind of skills that are 
taught in the military, it must be very difficult not to look at the 
greener pastures.
  There is another part of this bill that I want to address because it 
is one of the reasons why I am going to vote in favor of it. I 
sincerely believe that the Montgomery GI Bill should be revamped and am 
pleased that this legislation takes a step in that direction. When this 
body passed the GI Bill in 1984, the average annual cost of tuition at 
a four-year university was about $5,200. That number has since doubled 
with costs reaching above $11,000 for the school year 1996 to 1997. 
However, we are still offering basically the same amount of financial 
assistance per month and requiring that those eligible to use it first 
pay $1200 before they can receive anything back. I wholeheartedly agree 
that we should do away with that requirement and increase the amount of 
monthly assistance provided. It is the right thing to do. I also 
support the provision in this bill that allows immediate family members 
also to benefit from the education allowances. I am pleased that my 
friend--and fellow veteran--Max Cleland introduced this portion of the 
bill and that it was incorporated into the final version we are 
debating today.
  I don't believe there is a single one of us who would argue that we 
shouldn't do more for our Armed Services personnel. That is clear. 
There is no question that they need increases in their basic pay and an 
expansion of their education and retirement benefits. But it seems to 
me that we ought to be careful and at least examine--if not critically 
analyze--how best to go about addressing our recruitment and retention 
problems without trying to fast-tract a bill which has significant 
increases in funding, above and beyond what the Administration has 
requested, without adequately explaining how to pay for it.
  I believe that we owe it to our military men and women to determine 
how we are going to pay for this bill and how funds used for this 
purpose will affect overall spending and military readiness. What are 
the sources for funding this bill? Is this coming out of other accounts 
within the Pentagon's budget? Is it coming out of domestic spending? Is 
it going to be off-budget? Can we really afford to pay for this across 
all the pay scales? Are we going to tap into our large budget surplus? 
It is not clear to me that these critical questions have been answered.
  This bill requires funding for 10 years, not just this fiscal year. 
We don't have any ironclad promises that our economy will prove as 
strong tomorrow as it is today. I think we ought to be sure that the 
commitments we make now can be met in the future.
  I remain concerned that we are moving this bill in the absence of 
hearings by the Armed Services Committee and an overall discussion 
about how our defense dollars should be spent. However, I will support 
this bill because as a veteran, I understand how important it is to 
know that your country is behind you and to know that your country 
recognizes and rewards the service you have given it.


                            amendment no. 9

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, earlier today, the Senate voted on an 
amendment to S. 4 offered by my colleague Senator Crapo from Idaho. I 
voted ``present.''
  The amendment would eliminate a federal law that reduces the military 
retirement pay of those retirees who continue their public service by 
working for the federal government as civilians. As a Senator who would 
personally benefit from the amendment's passage, I am subject to a 
clear conflict of interest and thus cannot properly vote.
  As many of my colleagues know, I am retired Air Force Reserve 
officer. As such, my retirement pay from the Air Force would increase 
significantly if the Crapo amendment were signed into law. With that in 
mind, I voted present.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, I rise today to 
wholeheartedly endorse this Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's, and Marines' 
Bill of

[[Page 2771]]

Rights. With this bill, the members of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee are making a pledge to the men and women who so bravely 
defend our freedoms: we honor them, we respect them, they and their 
families are important to us, and we are going to take care of them. We 
have been asking them to get by for too long, with too little. Starting 
now, we are going to make good on our debt of gratitude.
  In my view, this bill addresses three key areas that must be fixed if 
we are going to be able to keep quality people in uniform. The largest 
pay raise since 1982, and annual raises that outpace inflation, will 
shrink a double-digit pay gap that has been growing for 20 years. 
Service men and women know they will never make as much as their 
civilian counterparts, and they serve proudly anyway. But we cannot 
tell them their contributions to America are invaluable, and then stand 
by and watch their earning power erode more and more each year without 
any plan for stopping the erosion. They deserve to provide their 
families with an honorable standard of living, and we are committed to 
doing that.
  In addition, Mr. President, raises for mid-level officers and 
enlisted personnel are designed to retain critical personnel and reward 
performance over longevity. Currently, some leaders are paid less than 
their subordinates due to an over-emphasis on years served rather then 
results achieved. We win or lose wars based on results, not seniority, 
and the pay chart ought to reflect that reality. We want to encourage 
and reward those who go ``above and beyond,'' and reinforce a culture 
dedicated to achievement and success.
  Restoring previously reduced retirement benefits to their original 
levels shows a commitment to our veterans' long term security and the 
value of a career of honorable service. Our troops spend an entire 
career living in danger, sacrificing their own interests and putting 
their country's needs ahead of their family's. We cannot in good 
conscience reward their service by cutting their retirement benefits.
  In closing, Mr. President, more than just voicing a commitment to our 
service men and women, we must take bold, swift action to put that 
commitment to work. We must provide them a long overdue increase in 
pay, we must reform the pay table to reward performance over longevity, 
and we must repeal the Redux retirement plan.
  Mr. LEVIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that William 
Adkins, a National Security fellow on the staff of Senator Abraham, be 
granted floor privileges during consideration of S. 4.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent, if it is OK with 
the floor managers, that immediately following disposition of an 
amendment which I understand is going to be offered by Senator Cleland, 
that the Chair then recognize the Senator from Kansas.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Georgia is recognized.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, thank you very much.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my legislative fellow, 
Deborah Buonassisi, be granted floor privileges to assist me during the 
debate of S. 4.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                            Amendment No. 4

(Purpose: To extend authorities relating to payment of certain bonuses 
                           and special pays)

  Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I offer an amendment to S. 4. I think the 
clerk has the amendment. It is a 3-year extension of special pay 
bonuses.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Georgia (Mr. Cleland) proposes an 
     amendment numbered 4.

  Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following new sections:

     SEC. 104. THREE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO 
                   PAYMENT OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL PAYS.

       (a) Aviation Officer Retention Bonus.--Section 301b(a) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999,'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002,''.
       (b) Reenlistment Bonus for Active Members.--Section 308(g) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (c) Enlistment Bonuses for Members With Critical Skills.--
     Sections 308a(c) and 308f(c) of title 37, United States Code, 
     are each amended by striking ``December 31, 1999'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (d) Special Pay for Nuclear-Qualified Officers Extending 
     Period of Active Service.--Section 312(e) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``December 31, 1999'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (e) Nuclear Career Accession Bonus.--Section 312b(c) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (f) Nuclear Career Annual Incentive Bonus.--Section 312c(d) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking ``any 
     fiscal year beginning before October 1, 1998, and the 15-
     month period beginning on that date and ending on December 
     31, 1999'' and inserting ``the 15-month period beginning on 
     October 1, 1998, and ending on December 31, 1999, and any 
     year beginning after December 31, 1999, and ending before 
     January 1, 2003''.

     SEC. 105. THREE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL 
                   PAY AUTHORITIES FOR RESERVE FORCES.

       (a) Special Pay for Health Professionals in Critically 
     Short Wartime Specialties.--Section 302g(f) of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking ``December 31, 
     1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (b) Selected Reserve Reenlistment Bonus.--Section 308b(f) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (c) Selected Reserve Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308c(e) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (d) Special Pay for Enlisted Members Assigned to Certain 
     High Priority Units.--Section 308d(c) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``December 31, 1999'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (e) Selected Reserve Affiliation Bonus.--Section 308e(e) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (f) Ready Reserve Enlistment and Reenlistment Bonus.--
     Section 308h(g) of title 37, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 
     31, 2002''.
       (g) Prior Service Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308i(f) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.
       (h) Repayment of Education Loans for Certain Health 
     Professionals Who Serve in the Selected Reserve.--Section 
     16302(d) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``January 1, 2000'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``January 1, 2003''.

     SEC. 106. THREE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL 
                   PAY AUTHORITIES FOR NURSE OFFICER CANDIDATES, 
                   REGISTERED NURSES, AND NURSE ANESTHETISTS.

       (a) Nurse Officer Candidate Accession Program.--Section 
     2130a(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 
     2002''.
       (b) Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses.--Section 
     302d(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting ``December 31, 
     2002''.
       (c) Incentive Special Pay for Nurse Anesthetists.--Section 
     302e(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``December 31, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``December 31, 2002''.


[[Page 2772]]

  Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I am pleased to bring before the Senate 
my amendment to S. 4, the Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's and Marines' 
Bill of Rights Act of 1999, which would extend key bonuses and special 
payments to the men and women of our armed forces for another three 
years.
  Mr. President, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
and the Service Secretaries have all testified and stated for the 
record that recruiting and retention are the most important challenges 
facing our military today.
  With a strong economy and the perception of a reduced military threat 
abroad, the incentives to leave the military, or to not enlist in the 
military, are greater than ever before. However, even with the end of 
the cold war, we have increased our military commitments around the 
world, in such places as Bosnia, Iraq, and Somalia. We are now facing a 
possible use of American forces in Kosovo. Those brave individuals, who 
are preparing to respond to our Nation's call deserve our every 
consideration and effort on their behalf. That is the whole reason of 
S. 4.
  The amendment I am now offering seeks to correct an oversight in the 
pending bill: namely, an extension of the authority for the services to 
provide special pay incentives for positions which have been hard to 
fill.
  The authority for many of these special pays and bonuses will expire 
in December 1999. My amendment would simply extend funding authority 
through the end of 2002. It would give the Services the certainty that 
these essential retention tools will continue to be available.
  These incentives affect many positions within our military, ranging 
from bonuses for aviation officers to special pay for health 
professionals. Passage of this amendment will reinforce S. 4's message 
that we as a nation take seriously our commitment to give our military 
the ability to continue to recruit and retain the finest servicemen and 
women in the world. I urge my colleagues to further that objective by 
adopting this amendment.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
  Mr. ALLARD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, it is my understanding that this is 
included in the budget. So we don't have an objection on this side. We 
view it as an important retention use to help keep our enlisted men and 
women in the armed services.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me commend our friend from Georgia for 
this amendment. He has made a number of major contributions already to 
this bill, most particularly in the transferability provision of the 
education benefits under the GI bill. That is a huge gain for our men 
and women in the military and for this Nation.
  Again, as I pointed out earlier, I thank him for the initiative that 
he took to have that provision added in committee.
  The amendment he is offering this afternoon is an important 
amendment. It will extend the authority for 3 years to pay bonuses and 
special pay which are so critical to both recruiting and retention of 
our military members, and we strongly support this amendment.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, before we vote, I want to recognize that 
Senator Cleland is my ranking member on the Personnel Subcommittee. He 
is working hard. And I am looking forward to continuing to work on 
these issues that will come up during this year. I think our 
subcommittee is going to have some of the toughest challenges of any 
subcommittee on Armed Services. It is good to have somebody such as 
Senator Cleland out there to help, and have somebody who served in the 
military and who walked in the shoes of the people whom we are passing 
legislation to have an impact on.
  With that, I yield the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? If not, the question 
is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Georgia.
  The amendment (No. 4) was agreed to.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized.

                          ____________________